Re: libpq debug log - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: libpq debug log
Date
Msg-id 3455705.1617299197@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: libpq debug log  ("'alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org'" <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>)
Responses Re: libpq debug log  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Re: libpq debug log  ("'alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org'" <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>)
List pgsql-hackers
"'alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org'" <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> writes:
> On 2021-Apr-01, Tom Lane wrote:
>> BTW, what in the world is this supposed to accomplish?
>> -                        (long long) rows_to_send);
>> +                        (1L << 62) + (long long) rows_to_send);

> It makes the text representation wider, which means some buffer fills up
> faster and the program switches from sending to receiving.

Hm.  If the actual field value isn't relevant, why bother including
rows_to_send in it?  A constant string would be simpler and much
less confusing as to its purpose.

            regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_amcheck contrib application
Next
From: Fujii Masao
Date:
Subject: Re: Data type correction in pgstat_report_replslot function parameters